6 ms·

Interesting... How would you quickly compare Arch vs #! vs Debian?

kfk 13y ago
Arch is very lean and it's absurdly up to date. Debian is a monstruosity and even it's testing branch is not as up to date as arch. However, arch breaks things often, very often. You make updates crossing fingers you will be able to reboot. Debian, crunchbang, overall, is very stable. It depends what you want. If you are not a linux guru and need to work on your system, then go for something easy and stable like debian, otherwise do go for arch. --- Edit Yes, I talked all the time about Debian and I missed #!. Let me say, crunchbang for me it's just an easy way to get a debian testing. I prefer it like this as last time I used Debian it had some rough edges I have no time anymore to smooth over. I want things to work out of the box and a good community, check #!, they actually have a nice welcoming community.
- TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
  Where is #! then?
  - buckbova 13y ago
    Isn't crunchbang a debian distro with openbox? You can put openbox on any distro you like including arch if that's what you are after.
    - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
      I know that - I'm just really confused about what crunchbang really is now. So it's just debian with a different default wm?
      - buckbova 13y ago
        "Put simply; CrunchBang could be thought of as a layer built on top of Debian, specifically to provide a great Openbox experience." http://crunchbang.org/about/ http://crunchbang.org/about/ That's kinda what I expected, an out of the box OpenBox setup built on top of Debian. It does say they use packages from their repository so there must be some differences than if you did it yourself.
    - crasshopper 13y ago
      yes, but archbang and crunchbang have nice defaults. As great as Arch's documentation is (best in all linuces I've tried), I still prefer to have some nice defaults so I can get stuff done whilst learning the knobs.
- at-fates-hands 13y ago
  I would say although Arch has a steep learning curve, there's plenty of documentation and tutorials about getting started. I have a machine that runs it and love it and I'm in no way a Linux guru. I've only had one update issue, otherwise, it's pretty been reliable.
  - cylinder714 13y ago
    Note that Manjaro (http://www.manjaro.org/ http://www.manjaro.org/) is a "user-friendly" distro based on Arch. I tried it briefly via a liveCD from a British Linux magazine, and it looked promising.
- crasshopper 13y ago
  Why do you say Debian is a "monstrosity"? What would that make Ubuntu then?

kfk 13y ago

Arch is very lean and it's absurdly up to date. Debian is a monstruosity and even it's testing branch is not as up to date as arch. However, arch breaks things often, very often. You make updates crossing fingers you will be able to reboot. Debian, crunchbang, overall, is very stable. It depends what you want. If you are not a linux guru and need to work on your system, then go for something easy and stable like debian, otherwise do go for arch. --- Edit Yes, I talked all the time about Debian and I missed #!. Let me say, crunchbang for me it's just an easy way to get a debian testing. I prefer it like this as last time I used Debian it had some rough edges I have no time anymore to smooth over. I want things to work out of the box and a good community, check #!, they actually have a nice welcoming community.

TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
Where is #! then?
- buckbova 13y ago
  Isn't crunchbang a debian distro with openbox? You can put openbox on any distro you like including arch if that's what you are after.
  - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
    I know that - I'm just really confused about what crunchbang really is now. So it's just debian with a different default wm?
    - buckbova 13y ago
      "Put simply; CrunchBang could be thought of as a layer built on top of Debian, specifically to provide a great Openbox experience." http://crunchbang.org/about/ http://crunchbang.org/about/ That's kinda what I expected, an out of the box OpenBox setup built on top of Debian. It does say they use packages from their repository so there must be some differences than if you did it yourself.
  - crasshopper 13y ago
    yes, but archbang and crunchbang have nice defaults. As great as Arch's documentation is (best in all linuces I've tried), I still prefer to have some nice defaults so I can get stuff done whilst learning the knobs.
at-fates-hands 13y ago
I would say although Arch has a steep learning curve, there's plenty of documentation and tutorials about getting started. I have a machine that runs it and love it and I'm in no way a Linux guru. I've only had one update issue, otherwise, it's pretty been reliable.
- cylinder714 13y ago
  Note that Manjaro (http://www.manjaro.org/ http://www.manjaro.org/) is a "user-friendly" distro based on Arch. I tried it briefly via a liveCD from a British Linux magazine, and it looked promising.
crasshopper 13y ago
Why do you say Debian is a "monstrosity"? What would that make Ubuntu then?